• 1stTime4MeInMCU@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Extremely rare side effects aside, what about all the kids whose lives you destroy by _not _ intervening? Do you know how many confused cis kids go on blockers, decide they want to stop and go on and live a cis life? It literally almost never happens.

      Of the children accessing trans healthcare available to minors, the overwhelming majority are trans kids who do not detransition or regret anything they do to transition. The kid you are “protecting” is that “confused cis kid” who is vastly outnumbered by genuinely trans children who will become transgender adults. By withholding blockers (at the minimum), you are sacrificing the well being of the overwhelming users of blockers, genuinely trans children, for the sake of the wellbeing of an almost non existent subgroup of confused cis kids.

      How many trans kids lives are worth sacrificing so that one cis kid might not accidentally do something totally reversible that might increase their risk of cancer the same amount as eating bacon?

      When you put it all together like that and the outcome is still a desire to prevent access, one has to ask: maybe the point is to make the trans kids suffer? Maybe the point is to make it harder for them to blend in with cis people? Maybe the point is to not treat their illness in hopes they give up and conform or kill themselves?

    • Dragonfruit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Please, just listen to trans people’s experiences so you can understand what you’re actually talking about. You can’t just try to take away people’s medical treatment because you don’t understand why they need it.

      As a probably-trans-but-still-questioning person, I can promise you that no one was “teaching” me to be uncomfortable with my gender when I was a kid.

      (Also, it’s important to point out that a lot of what you’re complaining about is not real treatments that are done. No one does gender affirming surgery on kids. And puberty blockers have been safely used on cis kids for decades so unless you want to take them away from them too, it’s not about how you think they’re dangerous, it’s about hurting trans people)

    • MonkRome@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Hormone therapy does increase risk of cancer, but puberty blockers do not as far as I’m aware. Kids take puberty blockers for many reasons, only one of which is to hold off on a gender decision. They are also used to pause early puberty or to prevent puberty when puberty would come with other adverse medical problems.

      And the increase risk of suicide is worse if no choice is given to transgender youth. Most of the suicidal ideation is attributed to the intolerance and hate transgender people experience, which leads to mental health issues, substance abuse, self hate, etc. The issue therefore is not being transgender, but with societies lack of acceptance, which you are presently participating in.

    • Tiefling IRL@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Virtually no kids are undergoing surgical transition. Trans care for minors usually involves medication that puts their puberty on pause until they are old enough to decide whether they wish to pursue transition. It is reversible.

    • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s what blockers are for. That seems to be the medical standard of care so non-doctor laypeople should not be opining on this

      • Edwardthefma99✡@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        35
        ·
        4 months ago

        blockers give a increased risk for cancer this is why you read the little booklet they give you when getting the drug if you dont get it ask the pharmacist for it it tells the risks and the side affects

        • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          4 months ago

          A medication might have a miniscule increase in chance for cancer? Say it ain’t so! We shouldn’t let kids eat processed meats then. Or have direct tap water. Or eat donuts. Or fly anywhere. Or go out in the sun. Or have diabetes. Or have a cell phone anywhere near their heads. Or drink soda. Or drink anything out of a plastic bottle. Or be around a scented candle. Or fall asleep with the TV on. The fact is that just existing increases your chances of cancer. To use that as a reason to not do something that’ll make you happier is insane and it will lead to you hiding under your bed for the rest of your life. Except that being at all sedentary will also increase risks of cancer so you can’t just hide either.

          • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            We shouldn’t let kids eat processed meats then.

            Or any meats. Watch the cons’ heads explode about “social engineering” if more and more authorities start trying to warn children away from the dangers of any meat. The cons are already cranking up their culture war against other healthy efforts like milk substitutes and have always had an uneasy detente with veg*n diets - but are increasingly getting more and more agitated about any change to their “way of life”, even if it’s wayyyy better for them.

            • Laurentide@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              To be fair, it’s kind of hard to come up with a defense when your premise is “Cancer treatments cause cancer” 😄

              • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                Try explaining to them even if that was the case, the risk of suicide and extreme self-harming is way more prescient than any long-shot cancer risk, but preferably blow thru their bullshit by pointing out all the things they defend to the death that are more harmful and more predictably so

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Based on the available evidence, the concerns about cancer in transgender populations, albeit biologically plausible, are neither adequately supported nor convincingly alleviated because of a lack of well-designed epidemiologic studies.

          From this paper.

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5868281/

          The biggest risk seems to be HPV causing cancer, which may not be related to hormones at all, but the fact that trans people may be more likely to have HPV to begin with. And how HPV will interact with gender affirming surgery, rather than with hormones.

          In other words, the jury is still out and what you are repeating is not science but likely transphobic propaganda.

          And on the other side of the equation you have to consider that gender incongruence causes severe suicidal ideation in a lot of transgender people.

          So, if it was your loved one struggling for decades with suicidal ideation and attempts, would you want them denied life-saving medication because it might increase the risk of cancer? Because that’s what your argument boils down too. Denying adults life-saving medicine because it’s plausible that it could increase the risk of cancer.

          And just to nail my point home, here’s an article on how common medications used to treat depression increase the risk of cancer. Should we stop prescribing those too?

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10259481/

          • Edwardthefma99✡@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            i did not say adults i was clearly meaning kids in sorry but givng kids cancer causing drugs is messed up if your a adult you have a fullly developed brain and cam make the decision appropriately

    • toomanypancakes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You know you can just say you hate trans people instead of dancing around it with bullshit. I didn’t get puberty blockers, which caused permanent damage to my body and mental health. I had to get expensive surgery I was fortunate enough to be able to get in order to fix some of that. You’re causing permanent damage to trans people by denying them a reversible medication out of fear that they may have negative side effects while ignoring the negative primary effects going through the wrong puberty causes.

      Stop being so fucking selfishly cruel.

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      teaching them to hate way they were born is just messed up

      You’re so right but not the way you think.

    • marx2k@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      “Won’t someone please think of the children” hysteria aside, this article is about adults.

    • GoddessNoAi@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Google WPATH Standards of Care and read that document for the truth. It’s the actual rules that doctors are supposed to follow for treating trans people.

      Until you’ve read that, you can’t have an informed opinion on the matter.